posted
I was having a debate with someone who kept telling me there where whites that have always been in the delta region of egypt and thats the reason he doesnt call egypt an ancient black african civilization he claims the delta region was a melting pot at the beginning of egypt civilization for whites i told him i found that impossible he kept trying to make it seem if there were any original whites there in egypt in the early dynasties there numbers were the same or as close to the number of black africans in egypt which i know just isnt true..i continued to ask this guy when he says WHITE does he mean caucasion was the word caucasion used in your study because i am aware caucasion does not mean RELATED TO EUROPE all the time,,,He would not answer me,,He says egypt was not a black african civilization like mali or ethiopia or sudan and i replied MAYBE YOU FEEL THAT WAY BECAUSE THE DIVERSITY egypt became as the dynasties passed on,,,He also denied that the african gene was the dominant gene refused to reply to me telling him WHEN you have a european that interbreeds with one of african decent the results are a mulatto looking humans that is still considered black because of the african dominance...So i found it hard to believe these so called WHITE people have been in the delta area since the beginning... ANYONE BESIDES THE IGNORANT ONES WHO ARE IN DENIAL care to share..here is what he posted to me....
quote:Keita S.O.Y Department of Surgery, Howard University Hospital, Washington, DC 20060. Historical sources and archaeological data predict significant population variability in mid-Holocene northern Africa. Multivariate analyses of crania demonstrate wide variation but also suggest an indigenous craniometric pattern common to both late dynastic northern Egypt and the coastal Maghreb region. Both tropical African and European metric phenotypes, as well intermediate patterns, are found in mid-Holocene Maghreb sites. Early southern predynastic Egyptian crania show tropical African affinities, displaying craniometric trends that differ notably from the coastal northern African pattern. The various craniofacial patterns discernible in northern Africa are attributable to the agents of microevolution and migration. J Hum Evol. 2000 Sep;39(3):269-88.
Like I said, your approach is tacky. If you want to argue this with me, you need to know a little something about bio-anthropology and history period. When these "whites" appear in North Africa, nobody can be for certain, but they have been there long enough to be called AFRICANS. They have been there long enough to be considered EGYPTIAN. Some speculate that they descend from the "Sea People". Mind you I'm not talking about Hamitic Hypothesis. Whatever the case, Egypt has always been multi-racial, regardless of the ratio.
"Ancient and modern Egyptian hair ranges from straight to wavy to woolly; in color, it varies from reddish brown to dark brown to black. Lips range from thin to full. Many Egyptians possess a protrusive jaw. Noses vary from high-bridged-straight to arched or even hooked to flat-bridged, with bulbous to broad nostrils. In short, ancient Egypt, like modern Egypt, consisted of a very heterogeneous population."
Protrusive jaws are typical of "negroids". Anthropologists call this prognathism.
He doesnt deny that many egyptians were black africans but he makes it seem as if egypt was always a melting pot for black africans and WHITES AS HE SAYS...He also posted photos of egyptians statues that he say didnt look african and i had told him that africans had characteristics of all humans on this earth pending were you are they are still african..I also told him that just because you see a yellow or lightskinned human you automatically throw it off as not being african when today there are lighter or redskinned africans..he also uses egyptians different hair textures as his example it seems and i told him that the different hair textures were due to climatory and humidity factors in differen parts of the world and africa not because they were WHITE as he calls it
[This message has been edited by Rick_james1 (edited 05 June 2005).]
[This message has been edited by Rick_james1 (edited 05 June 2005).]
Posts: 7 | From: washington dc | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
These people are aboriginal Southern Africans with no mixture whatsover yet they have yellowish complexions and epicanthic eyes like east Asians.
These two above are both Asians, one from China and the other from Cambodia.
Your friend has to realize that peoples of a designated 'race' do not come in one type of look, but vary in features. Perhaps the biggest problem is the belief that only white people vary.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
These people are aboriginal Southern Africans with no mixture whatsover yet they have yellowish complexions and epicanthic eyes like east Asians.
These two above are both Asians, one from China and the other from Cambodia.
Your friend has to realize that peoples of a designated 'race' do not come in one type of look, but vary in features. Perhaps the biggest problem is the belief that only white people vary.
I LOVE THE PICS........THOSE ASIAN BOYS LOOK BLACK THERE DAMN SELVES LOL..I KNOW MANY SRI LANKANS AND INDONESIANS AND PHILIPINOS AND EVEN VIETNAMESE HAVE AFRICAN BLOOD IN THEM.......
WHAT I,M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHO ARE THESE WHITE PEOPLE HE CLAIMS THAT ORIGINATED IN THE DELTA REGION I,M LED TO BELIEVE THAT HE IS MISTAKEN WHAT MAY BE LIGHTSKINNED AFRICANS AS BEING WHITE BECAUSE THE STUDIES HE HAVE READ USE THE TERM CAUCASION WHICH HE THOUGHT MEANT WHITE
[This message has been edited by Rick_james1 (edited 05 June 2005).]
Posts: 7 | From: washington dc | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rick_james1: ..I KNOW MANY SRI LANKANS AND INDONESIANS AND PHILIPINOS AND EVEN VIETNAMESE HAVE AFRICAN BLOOD IN THEM.......
This is the problem!! What you said is not true! These Asians do not have African blood at all, at least not any recent if that's what you mean!! They are pure Asian! Asian people vary just like any other race, without admixture!!!
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Delta is kind of tricky when it comes to studying ancient Egyptian pre-history. The oldest settlement in the Delta is the Merimede-Ben-Salama. Unfortunately due to the nature of the Delta not much archaeological or skeletal material survives as does in Upper Egypt.
I am sure you are familar with the Narmer palette because on this palette there appears two types of ethnic groups in the Delta:a short statued people with what appears to be a type of peper-corn hair,and another group that looks alot like the Asiatics you see the ancient Egyptians smiting in later scenes. Narmer[Aha-Menes] is shown subduing the two types of people present on the palette.
Here is an example of the early Delta types that are recorded in artwork:
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK! DUDE LAST I CHECKED ALL HUMANS HAD A LINK TO AFRICA....BUT IF YOUR SPEAKING WHAT I THINK YOU ARE SPEAKING THAN THESE ASIANS ARE STILL BLACK...THEY ARE NOT AFRICAN BUT THEY ARE STILL BLACK I THINK THE CLIMATES THERE IS SIMILAR TO AFRICAS CLIMATES WHICH IS WHY WE ARE BLACK
Posts: 7 | From: washington dc | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rick_james1: OK! DUDE LAST I CHECKED ALL HUMANS HAD A LINK TO AFRICA....
Yes, so they do have African blood, but not any recent.
quote:BUT IF YOUR SPEAKING WHAT I THINK YOU ARE SPEAKING THAN THESE ASIANS ARE STILL BLACK...THEY ARE NOT AFRICAN BUT THEY ARE STILL BLACK I THINK THE CLIMATES THERE IS SIMILAR TO AFRICAS CLIMATES WHICH IS WHY WE ARE BLACK
I wouldn't say they are black, but rather brown! The only black peoples in Asia are the aboriginal peoples like Negritos or Sri-Lankans who are of a different race than Southeast asians.
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 05 June 2005).]
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
OK! DUDE LAST I CHECKED ALL HUMANS HAD A LINK TO AFRICA....BUT IF YOUR SPEAKING WHAT I THINK YOU ARE SPEAKING THAN THESE ASIANS ARE STILL BLACK...THEY ARE NOT AFRICAN BUT THEY ARE STILL BLACK I THINK THE CLIMATES THERE IS SIMILAR TO AFRICAS CLIMATES WHICH IS WHY WE ARE BLACK
Thought Writes:
Hi Rick_james1 and welcome to the forum. Many of us have attempted to embrace a more scientific model for understanding human variability. How one looks or does not look is only a limited tool to understand how humans relate to one another. There are people who live in Asia that LOOK like some modern Sub-Saharan African people, yet they are genetically (blood) distant from said Africans than a Swede.
posted
What Thought is saying is that looks aren't everything and that genetically, blonde-haired blue-eyed whites are closer related to modern day Africans than the aboriginal peoples of Asia who look a lot like modern day Africans!!!
[This message has been edited by Djehuti (edited 05 June 2005).]
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The discussion on Ancient Egypt as it morphed into the special area studies named Egyptology has always been preoccupied with the "race" of the AEs and Nubians. And that's long before people of non-European descentever showed an interest in the topic--even in colonial Egypt itself.
The question is this: was/is there ever any debates concerning the "race" of the peoples who produced the other "major civilisations" so described by Western scholars. I refer to Mesopotamia, Greece, Harrapa and China? If not, why not?
The question is this: was/is there ever any debates concerning the "race" of the peoples who produced the other "major civilisations" so described by Western scholars. I refer to Mesopotamia, Greece, Harrapa and China? If not, why not?
Thought Writes:
AE must be made 'white' or atleast non-African because of the effect AE had on Greece and hence 'Western Civilization'.
quote:Originally posted by lamin: The discussion on Ancient Egypt as it morphed into the special area studies named Egyptology has always been preoccupied with the "race" of the AEs and Nubians. And that's long before people of non-European descentever showed an interest in the topic--even in colonial Egypt itself.
The question is this: was/is there ever any debates concerning the "race" of the peoples who produced the other "major civilisations" so described by Western scholars. I refer to Mesopotamia, Greece, Harrapa and China? If not, why not?
Not much debate on these other cultures you've pointed out, though every now and then, there are attempts to lay claim on Mesopotamia. The reason is simple: AE actually being the oldest Nation State, poses a problem to the Eurocentric ego, in that, it happens to be of African origin. The African origin poses a problem, because these folks weren't supposed to have the capacity to develope such a highly complex culture.
Eurocentric have tried to make Europeans the center of the universe, and superior to other races. In the process, they've tried to develope a pseudo 'racial' hierarchy, in which people of tropical African descent were to be placed beneath north western Europeans. How high a group is placed in this pseudo racial hierarchy, was determined by how close they supposedly ressembled these Europeans. These ideas have been expressed in one form or another in the likes of the Hamitic myth. Only, in the Hamitic myth, the so-called Hamites were supposed to have had genetic input from what is perceived as a "caucasoid" race, and hence enhancing the intellectual capacity of indigenous Africans, whom they somehow supposedly mixed with. The irony here, is that these views were held at a time, when Europeans had adopted segregationist policies in the places they invaded. Others try to take the route that, modern humans independently originated in different regions of the world, which again, is no more than another means to avoid accepting Africa, the continent of people they are supposed to be superior to, as the cradle of modern humans.
I think you might be reffering to the African-Aqatic culture. This was a theory by John Sutton. This was when the Sahara was hyper-moist.
No, I'm not referring to the African-Aquatic culture but a term that describes the peoples of North Africa before the Nilo-Saharan or Afrasian speakers took over.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was an article I read long time ago. The term Paleo-Saharan is just a general collective term that describes the peoples that lived in North Africa before Nilo-Saharans of Afrasians.
I will try to find more about it.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic